Bihar unit of PUCL constituted a team of enquiry on request of Lok Sang ram
Morcha for alleged killing of Viswanath Yadav, alias PP, alias Pratap, an area
Commander of people's War Group. The two member enquiry team headed by ram Chandra
Lal Das State president along with Ramadhar Singh a member of PUCL made a visit
to Bihta to find out the truth.

The team reached Bihta on 16th of January at 10 AM and from there proceeded
to the spot from where Pratap, alias PP, is said to have been lifted and shot
dead at a distant place in an 'encounter'. As per the complaint the place is
situated at village Raghopur, a suburb of Bihta, near Agricultural Produce Market
Committee building, Bihta. On enquiry it was found that the house is situated
in a closed street at a distance of a furlong from the main (Patna -Aurangabad
Road). It belongs to one Sonu Kumar. It is said that in that very house on the
first floor, in a very small room, Bishwanath Yadav alias Pratap alias PP, was
staying. Inspector Mudrika Prasad, Officer in charge, Bikram PS, Circle Inspector
Lal Bahadur Ram, Circle Inspector, Sanjay Kumar Jha, Hawaldar of armed forces,
constable no. 1622 Sabhapati Prasad, Constable no. 4376 Surendra Misra, Constable
2221 Ram Swarup Singh, Constable no 3181 Gajendra Prasad Himanshu, Constable
no 64, Pradeep Prasad, Constable no. 2140 Md. Shamim Ahmed, Constable No. 709
Subhash Chandra Bose, Constable No 1272 Brajesh Kumar Jha, constable driver
4010 Shiv Chandra Rai, Officer in charge Paliganj, Circle Inspector Dillu Lohar,
Officer in charge, Dulhin Bazaar, Circle Inspector Ram Bhajju Raya, Armed Force
Hawaldar bearing No. 153 Deep Narayan Bandak, Hawaldar Gobind Prasad, Constable
No 2589 Birendra Pd. Singh, Constable no1129, 1698, Ram Anugrah Singh, Constable
driver no. 1129 Deol, surrounded the house from all sides and started searching.
Pratap is a 'hard core criminal extremist' in the police records. Pratap, on
alarm, jumped from the roof to the nearby house of Kariman Thakur, adjacent
to the house where he was living. But in the mean time the police party who
compelled Pratap to surrender intercepted him. Thereafter his hands were tied
and a blanket was wrapped on his face and he was forcibly dragged from the scene
towards Bikram.

The incident took place in broad daylight in the full view of a large number
of persons, as it was the busy market day. Many persons residing nearby the
place of occurrence were interviewed, including Baiju Shah S/o Shankar Shah.
Everyone confirmed the above version in unison. Enquiry was also made on this
point by cross-examining the Society members, including traders, shopkeepers,
and employees of the local market yard under the Bihar State Agricultural Marketing
Board. All of them rectified the incident to be true as has been alleged.

Thereafter, the team visited Bihta PS and talked about the incident with the
officials available there. There is direct allegation against Mr. Ram Sahay
Rai, the officer in charge of Bihta PS, the he was the main person responsible
for the whole incident and it was he who arrested Pratap from shop in the Bihta
market while he was purchasing something from the shop. In view of this it was
very essential to take his version on the incident. But incidentally he was
not available at that time.

In his absence Mr. Bideshwar and Rajendra Singh, wireless operator, Bigan Singh
A.S I, in charge of records, were available and their version was recorded.
In their respective statements they denied of having any information to the
effect. In support of their version they showed as the station dairy in which
there was no mention about the incident as per the station diary entry dated
10.12.99. In their defense they said that the entire police personnel of the
Bihta PS was badly engaged on that day in managing the movement of marriage
party in the marriage of Chief Minister's daughter because the bridegroom is
the native of a that village falls under the jurisdiction of Bihta Police. On
being asked the specific question whether they had any knowledge of the incident
as it is alleged to have taken place, they denied that any such incident had
taken place under Bihta PS. All they said was that they came to know from the
newspaper itself on the very next day. However, the wireless operator, Mr. Rajendra
Singh, disclosed that he knew the entire police operation done in this connection
through the onward transmissions on his wireless set. Mr. Singh, however, accepted
that had there been any knowledge about the presence of Pratap at Bihta, no
police officer, specially the present officer in charge, Mr. Ram Sahay Rai,
could have resisted the temptation to avail an opportunity to show the gallantry
in killing a naxalite. He also said that Mr. Ram Sahay Rai is still lamenting
that he has missed the opportunity to establish his bravery in killing such
a hard-core criminal about whom he knew right from his tenure at Masaurhi. He
also accepted readily that nobody could resist such temptation. So, in this
case Ram Sahay Rai might have killed a person like Pratap, even in the name
of encounter, as it would have added a great achievement and honor to his career.

From the above disclosure this possibility cannot be ruled out that Mr. Ram
Sahay Rai and his men at the Bihta PS might have been in the raid and might
have played a vital role in arresting PP. In this statement Mr. Rajendra Singh
has said that PP used to stay with some Pushpa Devi, daughter of Indradeb Singh,
who is his concubine. On that basis the involvement of Bihta Police and the
possibility of it having played a vital role in the arrest cannot be overlooked
easily. Specially, when Mr. Ram Sahay Rai was posted earlier at Masaurhi to
which place Pratap belonged.

On the other side of the story, the police in their FIR lodged by one Mudrika
Prasad, Officer in Charge Bikram, on 11.12.1999, maintain that they killed one
of the extremist in a stiff encounter at a place situated at, approximately,
half a kilometer from Rania Talab. The FIR has been lodged against "unknown"
at 5 PM. On the day after the incident, i.e., 11.12.99, on the other hand, this
news of police crackdown appeared in all the newspapers of the Capital. It is
very surprising that though the incident is said to have taken place at 12 midnight
of the 10th December; the report published in the papers was received from the
District Police headquarters in which Mr. Rabindra Shahkaran, SP Rural, along
with Arshad Jama, Dy. SP Danapur, gave the entire details of the police action
in which Bishwanath alias PP was killed. On the other hand, the concerned FIR
was lodged much after the statement given by the high police officers against
the "unknown" person. This inconsistency in the police version of
the incident creates serious doubts.

From the averment of the people who came before the enquiry team confirm the
fact that Bishwanath, alias PP, was picked up from the house of Sonu Kumar in
broad daylight and was murdered somewhere else. This suspicion gains ground
further when it is given out that when the wife of the deceased Pratap, Sugia
Devi, approached the postmortem house she came to know that the dead body had
already been handed over to one Yogendra Sah, Hawaldar, as per postmortem entries.
It was also known that the dead body was disposed of, with the help of armed
constables, near the Poonpoon Bridge in the Ganga basin near Danapur.
After analyzing the entire episode and the FIR it appears that police had information
about the presence of Pratap in the House of Sonu Paswan on the day and he was
nabbed at the spot in a well planned action, he was a wanted person in police
records. It is an admitted fact that Pratap belonged to on outlawed extremist
group and he might be having a criminal record though the Bihta police denied
any such entry in their record. Still, it does not confer any right to the police
to kill him in a fake encounter. Any criminal also is guaranteed treatment according
to law. His illegal acts are required to be dealt with under the established
procedure of law.

The enquiry committee is of considered view that the Pratap was killed in a
fake encounter in violation of all norms of justice and human right guaranteed
to the citizen of India and the police has tried to hush up the matter by trying
to make a false case. It filed a fabricated FIR. The FIR is at variance with
the facts of the incident as found by the Committee.

Recommendations: Since the names of the police party involved in the
case are on record, these guilty officers should be prosecuted for criminal
acts and violation of human rights and rule of law. The State Government should
be held liable for compensating the next of the kin suitably in the light of
the directives of the Supreme Court as well as the Human Right Commission.